New Ryzen Running Stable On Linux, Threadripper Builds Kernel In 36 Seconds (phoronix.com)

An anonymous reader writes: After AMD confirmed the a "performance marginality problem" affecting some Ryzen Linux users, RMAs are being issued and replacement Ryzen processors arriving for affected opensource fans. Phoronix has been able to confirm that the new Ryzen CPUs are running stable without the segmentation fault problem that would occur under very heavy workloads. They have also been able to test now the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. The Threadripper 1950X on Linux is unaffected by any issues unless you count the lack of a thermal reporting driver. With the 32 threads under Linux they have been able to build the Linux kernel in just about a half minute.

Comments

Apple needs this not the $700 more intel cpu!

[Joe_Dragon]

Apple needs this not the $700 more intel cpu!

Re:Apple needs this not the $700 more intel cpu!

[alvinrod]

I think I had read that Apple is locked into a deal with Intel for several more years, so I wouldn't expect to see any AMD processors soon.

I suspect that in the long run, Apple's plan is to replace Intel with their own custom chips. Their recent ARM SoCs don't clock as high as Intel chips, but they have been able to achieve similar performance per clock in many areas.

It's probably still a few years before they make the move to their own chips, but it seems like that's where they're going. This seems even more likely as the amount of performance needed for consumer PCs is going to remain relatively fixed while improvements in chip design and fabrication processes make it economically possible for Apple to use their own SoCs in their notebooks or desktops even if they can't compete with the most powerful high-end Intel or AMD chips.

Perhaps Apple will start designing products intended for the professional market that still use those high-end CPUs from Intel/AMD, but most of their customers don't require that level of power and it's probably much more cost economical for Apple to use their own custom chips, especially if they have lower power draw for similar levels of performance.

Re:Apple needs this not the $700 more intel cpu!

[stabiesoft]

Does AMD have an x86 license that is transferrable in the case of a change of control? It could be no one can buy AMD and retain the jewel.

Re:Apple needs this not the $700 more intel cpu!

[msauve]

RISC core with a bigger cache and memory controller. They could call it PowerPC.

Re:Apple needs this not the $700 more intel cpu!

[ganjadude]

dear god no. apple cannot buy AMD. they are finally waking up after a decade slumber, last thing i want to see is apple owning them.

What is an average kernel build time?

[CycleFreak]

For those of us that have not actually built a kernel, is 36 seconds astonishingly fast? A little faster? A totally random number with no meaning whatsoever?

Maybe some of you that do build kernels every once in a while could share your times along with specs for your rig.

Re:What is an average kernel build time?

[TimothyHollins]

For those of us that have not actually built a kernel, is 36 seconds astonishingly fast?

I did a little checking and here's what I found. It's faster than 37 seconds, but not as fast as 35 seconds.

Re:What is an average kernel build time?

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends a lot on how you configure it. If it's 36 seconds to compile a stripped bare kernel, it's mildly impressive. If it's 36 seconds to compile a complex kernel with tons of options, modules, etc. it's very impressive. I used to compile kernels with options for a home computer in 10-15 minutes in the late 90s early aughts (486-PIII days). A complex config might take hours. No doubt modern kernel compilation is more complex.

Re:What is an average kernel build time?

[CycleFreak]

That is incredibly helpful insight. You should work at Gartner.

Re:Stable at last!

[DontBeAMoran]

My AMD 80386 DX-40 was stable.

Re:Inaccurate Article

[courteaudotbiz]

That's what PR is all about. It's not about getting the problems fixed: it's about getting people to think that the problem is fixed.

Engineers usually fix problems. But right now, they don't want to issue a full recall, so they still sell the old - defective - CPUs assuming that most people run Windows on top of it.

Do any company really care about a desktop processor running a "server" OS like Linux? No.

Hell, most consumer / prosumer Intel chipsets have no drivers for W2K12 / W2K16. Tweaks exist, but not for the faint of heart.

Re:Stable at last!

[ckatko]

What the hell does heat have to do with stability?

I've been running AMD processors since the X2. And X4... and AMD FX-8370. All of which run 100% fine to this day. (Even though I've had more than 2 motherboards die in the last couple years, the same CPUs keeps running fine.)

My childhood friend ran an AMD Athlon 64 when they first came out.

I used an AMD K6-266 when I was a teenager, and have numerous 486's (and even a 586 IIRC) lying around that still run. I even have a fucking AMD 8088 in my Compaq "Portable" (36 LBS!) built in 1986.

And I'm not even a complete AMD fanboy. I'm a fanboy for my wallet. I've run nVidia videocards ever since 3DFX and my Voodoo 2 and 3 went tits up.

But as for unreliable, I have no fucking idea what you're talking about. And there are tons of hot Intel CPUs out there. Pentium 4 HT's ran at a whopping 110 Watts back in the year 2000. My FX-8370 runs at... 125 W. And the Core i7 3970X Extreme Edition runs at... 150W. Now, you can cite the FX-9570 at 220W but that was a joke CPU (Google: "outlier") using a dated architecture to keep a little trickle of money coming into AMD from die-hard enthusiasts. It cost over $100 more, and only got like 15% more throughput than my 8370, while consuming another 100 watts of power.

So yeah, AMD's typically run a little hotter because they have to make up for their worse fab technology (of which Intel a supreme leader). But as for super hot, or being unreliable... you better pull some citations out of your ass.

Can Confirm

[iCEBaLM]

Have an Ryzen 7 1700 that was affected by the segfault issue. Contacted AMD, they wanted a pic of my case to make sure it wasn't a thermal issue. Then asked me to try some different vcore/vsoc voltages and retest. When I still had the problem they shipped me out a brand new in box CPU, and it's been working perfectly.

AMD support is bloody stellar.

Re:Can Confirm

[ffkom]

"Bloody stellar" I would call if they:

- Had an understanding of the root cause of the bug, and told the public what it was and how they solved it
- Told everyone how to distinguish affected CPUs from unaffected CPUs (without a multi-hour run of some test-script that not AMD, but desparate affected buyers implemented and made available)
- Recalled all the defective CPUs and replaced them with working ones, including CPUs sold as part of computers

What you describe is rather the bare minimum they owe customers going through lots of trouble due to a defect product they were sold.

Threadripper != Ryzen

[Billly Gates]

Yes they are very similiar but Threadripper is their consumer version of the upcoming Xeon competitor.

AMD admitted it did little testing on the regular Ryzen line as most consumers would be running WIndows anyway and admitted in the future they will test this out. FreeBSD is also impacted by the same bug where things get out of order and corrupted under heavy loads.

Threadripper has more cache and a different caching and memory as it supports NUMA and non-NUMA for server oriented loads and this is where the bug is here.

Unfortunately, this makes me very cautious to purchase an AMD system as it does have a reputation of being bargain grade. But, it is a brand new architecture from scratch. I maybe open to Ryzen2 or Threadripper2 after some of the bugs are worked out.